September 7, 2012

During election years, everybody is supposed to genuflect to Hispanic Numbers, although the usual acts of obeisance are often inept. For example, the Obama Administration engineered that the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate in Arizona go to Richard Carmona, a guy with a remarkable track record: high school dropout; Vietnam vet; sheriff; nurse; doctor; surgeon; was shot by a lunatic but the wounded Carmona pulled his gun and killed the shooter; Surgeon General under Bush; the GOP wanted him to run for Congress in 2006; but he then changed from Republican to Independent in protest over various Bush policies.

The only problem is: Carmona's not Mexican. He's a Puerto Rican from New York City. This is a general problem: 35 million Mexicans in the U.S. and not a lot of amazing individuals. Thus, the recent silliness of everybody pretending the ceremonial mayor of San Antonio is really a powerhouse executive.

All immigrant groups are not created equal. Polish Catholics, for instance, appear roughly equal in number to Jews in the U.S., but have negligible clout in U.S. culture outside of maybe outfielders. Consider the Borat episode in 2006, in which Polish-American complaints about being assaulted with a giant old-fashioned Polish Joke of the kind that Yiddish-speakers brought to the U.S., and having Borat wildly celebrated by Jewish critics went virtually unheard.

Likewise, I've often argued that in the long run, the most important element of the current immigration mix in terms of setting the tone of politics in the future are not Mexicans, but South Asians. They are articulate in English, and are one of the few groups who seem to like to argue in public. Indians, though, seem to lack the edge, that motor of internal hostility and aggression that makes male Jews the reigning World's Heavyweight Champs at both getting the last word and at being funny. For example, on the Atlantic Magazine's 2009 list of the most important pundits in America, Jewish men were over-represented by a factor of about 50.

But it's easy to imagine a future in which Asian Indians rank second among ethnic groups in opinion-molding in America.

So, it's important to study the voting and ideology of South Asians. They are a high income group from a socially conservative part of the world, so they are natural Republicans, right.?From the Guardian:

An impressive 84% of the 2.85 million-strong Indian-American community voted for Mr Obama in 2008, second perhaps only to African-Americans as a minority group.

Has he still got their love? It appears so.

According to a Pew Research Center survey released in June, 65% of Indian-Americans approve of the way Mr Obama is handling the presidency.

Of all the Asian American groups surveyed, Indian-Americans were the most Democratic-leaning, again at 65%. Only 18% favoured Republicans.

Well, good luck Republicans with the rest of the 21st Century. You will need it.

The most obvious step is to take away South Asians' valuable status as minorities eligible for various minority-only benefits to business. Go back to pre-1982 when they were just Caucasians not entitled to racial spoils. Right now, South Asians have a financial incentive to identify as victimized minorities -- indeed, the applications Indian entrepreneurs have to fill out for government benefits in terms of procurement and loans often demand that they concoct narratives about how discriminated against they are by whites. Remove this destructive incentive and the traditional South Asian aspiration to whiteness will re-emerge.

The christian fundamentalism of the Republican Party is a huge turnoff to most Indian-Americans. Not surprisingly it is the christian indian-americans who tend to support the Republicans and are playing prominent roles in the GOP Examples: Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley, Dinesh D'Souza

"The most obvious step is to take away South Asians' valuable status as minorities eligible for various minority-only benefits to business."

I've known a lot of Asian-Indians in my life and I guarantee that is NOT the main reason for their liberalism. Asian-Indians may be culturally conservative but they have a long history of political leftism or at least anti-Westernism. This is due to the legacy of British Imperialism and, ironically, the influence of post-war British leftist ideology. After WWII, not only was India 'liberated' from British rule but Britain was 'liberated' from tradition and conservatism. Thus, UK, like much of Europe, became the fountain of leftist ideology, and most Indians who lived in Britain after WWII absorbed leftist ideas.

Also, in the US, Hindus tend to be highly educated and that means... they came under the influence of a whole lot of leftist ideology from Jewish professors. And Hindus love pop culture, and pop culture is multi-culti and liberal and etc.

The global-capitalist side of New India since the 90s--with rise of BJP--might be deemed 'conservative' , but what is 'right' over there isn't necessarily over here. Even for most pro-capitalist Hindus, the Democratic Party is preferable because it is more OPEN BORDERS. Guys like Fareed Zakaria might sometimes sound conservative and pro-market, but people like him think open borders globalism is good for India, and so they'll support the party that is more open borders and more inviting of 'diversity'.

Changing Hindus into 'whites' won't change this. Also, calling Hindus 'whites' would be wrong because they are not white. Instead, we should keep them 'not white' but deny any preferences to all groups except blacks with roots in America and American Indians. That is the right way to do it. Using Sailer's logic, why not designate blacks as whites too and do away with affirmative action on that basis?No, genetically and historically, Asian Indians are not white, and people in the HBD community should not play fast and loose with racial categories just for political ends. That would suggest race is indeed just a social construct.

Firstly, the republicans are too dumb understand this reasoning. I remember a fascinating email from two big money ricky perry donors when he was running for president. They seemed to believe that Hispanics being "pro family and pro life" makes them "natural republicans" if only they were not alienated by pesky immigration laws. Stevospherics will know that this is silly but these guys seem to believe this 100%.

The Republicans minority strategy seems to be to hope enough of them become fundies and will vote their cult, sorry faith.

Secondly; even if the Republicans wised up they would be greeted with shrieks of racism from every whiteness studies professor in America. Every other officially "oppressed group" would join in the chorus and what with the Republicans not willing to show the least bit of resolve for anything other than defending the rich they'd quickly wilt.

The important factor here is that Jews, on average, tend to be significantly wealthier than most other demographic groups. This is the main reason why Jews are more powerful than Poles and other ethnic groups of similar size.

"They are a high income group from a socially conservative part of the world, so they are natural Republicans, right.?"

If you say you have a group highly-educated non-Christians who mostly live in America's big cities (especially New York and the Bay Area), absolutely no one would be shocked that they vote Democrat.

Rural, evangelical Christian South Asians who graduated high school only probably are very heavily Republican. The issue is that there are probably about 10 of those voters in the entire country.

Unless the Republican party ditches the white Christian conservative thing and starts pitching Hindu/caste-based tribalism, what about them exactly is supposed to be appeal to South Asians? Their stellar governance of the country?

Poles are invisible in part because so many of them changed their long and difficult last names to something short and Anglo. They also blend in well as they are fairly pale and have a western euro religion. In other words, like German Americans they are more numerous than they appear, and make up a fairly large fraction of "generic white" Americans.

Also they are most concentrated in rust belt cities around the great lakes, which further makes them less visible, as does their stereotypical reserved personalities. Polish jokes haven't been popular since the 50s, so it is hard to complain about subtextual jokes at their expense. I also don't think Borat was aimed at poles because their anti-semitism has always been low compared to their neighbors, which is why Poland had the highest Jewish percentage in the world before WWII.

The only two things that incline immigrant groups to the GOP are Christianity and fleeing communism, which is why they do best with Cubans and Vietnamese. California's inland cities have some evangelical Russian immigrants who also fit this pattern and are hardcore Republican.

Too bad about the all-but-proved rumors about Nikki Haley's cheating on her husband. I think she would have been a great VP pick otherwise and enough to peel some Indians away, maybe even other Asian groups at the margin.

The notion that South or East Asians on net benefit from the affirmative action complex is laughable. Whatever pitiful spoils they might get from a few government contracts here and there they pay for 100 times over in college and grad school admission.

The difference in admissions standards for East/South Asians from Whites is equal to or greater than the magnitude of the difference between Whites and Blacks. So maybe 0.5% of Indians benefit from some minority owned business contract, but the 95%+ who pursue higher education get screwed by affirmative action.

Indians don't vote Republican for the same reason as Jews. The Republican party is the party of Christianity. Evangelical Christians have firmly rooted themselves at the core of the party and its platform. A socially conservative Hindu is no more likely to vote for a socially conservative Christian, as a socially conservative Christian would vote for a Wahhabi Muslim.

The Republican party can easily get the Asian vote by pushing the dismantling of the affirmative action spoils systems, as Asians get even more screwed than Whites. Just drop the Christianity BS and embrace Goldwater style libertarianism. Evangelical Christianity in politics has no future because religion is dying out and most of the younger generation is irreligious or even outwardly atheist. But libertarianism is only getting more popular, especially among younger people, look at demographics of Ron Paul's crowds compared to Rick Santorum.

If the Republican party insists on hitching its wagons to a dying religion for some short term electoral success in intellectual backwaters like Missouri than its fate is certainly sealed.

Personally I think any neutral, and non captain-of-industry individual not R. identified via race, would vote Dem. Then too, they probably benefit more from loose immigration than not. Then /too/, take anything done by or said by R. presidents of the recent past, Romney included, and if you take that as representative of Rs and you're smart enough to filter out the empty crap and /vote your interests/, there's no choice. I don't think Indians /need/ handouts yet, if they ever do. I don't see a need for it to be nearly as grounded in handout-grubbing as you think. /not Indian

I have long been flummoxed by the Indian tendency to vote Dem, but the idea that they do so for minority bennies is utterly ludicrous.

Gummdu's explanation makes the most sense to me, as to why parents of my kids are a) planning on selecting their child's mate b) highly educated engineers c) victimized by affirmative action and d) resolutely voting Dem. It's the first one I've heard that makes some small amount of sense.

The second generation might be less likely to do so. I'd like to see some numbers.

For a long time, Wikipedia explained that Polack jokes were introduced to the U.S. after WWII by German Nazis. It makes perfect sense: who is known for a better sense of humor than Nazis and who was more fashionable after WWII.

The christian fundamentalism of the Republican Party is a huge turnoff to most Indian-Americans.

And by "christian fundamentalism" you mean "the lip-service the Republican party pays to Christians around election time every couple of years".

Let's cut the crap - "christian fundamentalism" is not the hang-up for non-Christians. Christianity is, in any shape or form.

It's very similar to the way non-whites soil themselves at any hint that whites might some day engage in the exact same racialist thinking which the non-whites are currently engaged in. If that ever happens the whole gravy-train for Americans pampered "minorities" - a group which very much includes Indians - will come to an abrupt halt.

No, genetically and historically, Asian Indians are not white, and people in the HBD community should not play fast and loose with racial categories just for political ends. That would suggest race is indeed just a social construct.

But they are caucasoid. The Caucasoid race can be divided into main sub-races: whites (Europeans) and non-white caucasoids (south Asians/north Africans/peoples of middle eastern ancestry)

The mongoloid race can also be subdivided into East Asians, arctic people and Amerindians

The Negroid race can be subdivided into 3 main sub races: congoids, capoids, and australoids (yes I realize australoids have lived out of Africa for tens of thousands of years and accumulated differences in junk DNA, but they preserve the Negroid phenotype)

"I also don't think Borat was aimed at poles because their anti-semitism has always been low compared to their neighbors, which is why Poland had the highest Jewish percentage in the world before WWII. "

The important factor here is that Jews, on average, tend to be significantly wealthier than most other demographic groups. This is the main reason why Jews are more powerful than Poles and other ethnic groups of similar size.

You've got cause and effect backward. Jews have money (and power) because they are more intelligent and more ethnocentric than whites. Brilliant Jews employ, cite, buy from and give all manner of legs up to their compatriots. That gives them wealth and influence, and this they will achieve nearly anywhere they are placed.

Not only that, their high verbal IQ makes them a natural fit for positions that are arbiters of thought - journalists, writers and editors. When most of what will be read by a nation's people is passed through a filter of "Is it (what that particular Jew believes is) good for the Jews?", the output of the press and media is what you get.

Note that what Jews believe is good for the Jews (strongly influenced by their own propaganda organs such as the ADL, SPLC and Hollywood) is orthogonal to what is actually good for the Jews. The reality is that the ideas of a very small group of people, the Frankfurt school, have been held up as being "good for Jews" and seemingly without much analysis up until at least say, the year 2000.

This is not the first fad embraced by large numbers of Jews as the next big thing, only to be abandoned and hated viscerally by them in later years. See Christianity for a good example of this. Jews are smart, not omniscient.

Minorities are almost never conservative. That would involve supporting the traditions and culture of the majority group, and that culture isn't theirs.

If my experience is any indication, liberal Indian-Americans are going to have a tough time of it in politics. Conservative Indian-Americans (Ponnuru, D'Souza) are good eggs, but liberal Indians are pretty much all dicks. They can't hide their contempt from anyone.

Another problem: Indian men find it tough to get white chicks, but white men have no problem getting Indian chicks.

"The most obvious step is to take away South Asians' valuable status as minorities eligible for various minority-only benefits to business."

The most obvious step is to cut immigration across the board. We don't need another non-white ruling class.

"The difference in admissions standards for East/South Asians from Whites is equal to or greater than the magnitude of the difference between Whites and Blacks."

Bullshit. Asians make up about 30% of the Harvard student body. They do better than whites financially and professionally, but not in the same ratio that whites do better than blacks. The Forbes 400 is about 55-60% non-Jewish white, and only 0.25% black (Oprah). But Harvard is perhaps only 30% non-Jewish white and ~6% black.

If whites at Ivy League schools were favored over Asians to the same degree that blacks are favored over whites, there wouldn't be any blacks at Harvard, or there would be far, far fewer Asians.

"Republicans attacked Nikki Haley for her religious background"

And Haley almost won the majority in a four-way primary against three opponents with better name ID. Yeah, her being Christian made all the difference. You have to make some effort to show you've cast your lot with this people and not with the folks in the old country.

"In Iowa, Swati Dandekar was attacked by her Republican opponent, for being a Hindu

In Minnesota, Satveer Chaudhury was attacked by his Republican opponent for being a Hindu"

What we see here is instinctive love of victimology, the uncontrollable joy of pretending to be a victim. And the Democrats are the party of victimology. I suspect it's a major source of its appeal to Indians. Rec1man's comments ring true - the Indians I've known love that psychological state. Claiming victimhood is their default stance in inter-group relations, both towards Indians and towards non-Indians. Any movement that makes a point of looking askance at that psychological state would most likely seem alien, disturbing, perhaps even threatening to Indians.

But they are caucasoid. The Caucasoid race can be divided into main sub-races: whites (Europeans) and non-white caucasoids (south Asians/north Africans/peoples of middle eastern ancestry)

The Negroid race can be subdivided into 3 main sub races: congoids, capoids, and australoids (yes I realize australoids have lived out of Africa for tens of thousands of years and accumulated differences in junk DNA, but they preserve the Negroid phenotype)

I struggle to put this nicely, but this is wrong, and is recognizable as wrong even without knowledge of modern genomics. Straw-manning aside, physical anthropologists had, by the 20th century, intuited schema much more nuanced and much more correct than the platonic triangularity of the three-race concept.

South Asians are a highly admixed set of populations with substantial ancestry from the aboriginal and ingressive pre-IE populations of the subcontinent, who were extremely distinct from any European population. North Africans, Middle Easterners, and others in your "non-white caucasoid" category have, to varying extents and in conformity with historical-geographic expectations, minor to substantial Sub-Saharan African, South Asian, and (in Turkic, Caucasus, and some Iranian Plateau peoples) East Eurasian ancestry.

Of course, even the archetypal "white caucasoid" Nordic Europeans are themselves an ancient composite including non-negligible contribution from populations that were quite certainly non-caucasoid phenotypically (see blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/09/across-the-sea-of-grass-how-northern-europeans-got-to-be-10-northeast-asian/ for an accessible account of a relevant recent study).

To my eye Australian aborigines and even kinky-haired Melanesians are only superficially negroid-like (you might see what I mean if you compare Papuan and South African albinos). At any rate they're genetically sister to East Eurasians, though much more distantly than Amerindians are, with probable affinities to at least some negrito peoples in Southeast and South Asia.

As for that remark about "junk DNA" (sic) ... I'm not sure you really understand what that term means, but you should know that there's no real justification for dismissing genetic findings about Australomelanesian distinctness from SSAs as a weird fluke obscuring the actual tree.

The Legendary Linda is technically right on whether Asian Indians are white.

Indians are descended from a combination of Aryans, who at least linguistically are related to Iranians and Europeans and an older stratum of population (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_languages) in the subcontinent that are hard to classify racially. If you have to shoehorn everyone into white/ black/ yellow, the Aryan component is pretty clearly white and the Dravidian component I guess would be black.

In other words, Indians are more "white" than Hispanics, and somewhat like Hispanics are a racial mixture that doesn't fit easily into American racial categories.

Of course, you can just define "white" as "European ancestry", simply exclude Arabs, Indians, Hispanics (and Shephardic Jews!), and not deal with this problem, though you still have anomalies with Iranians and Turks. If you want to base this on ancestry and linguistic and historical migration patterns, then all these groups except most Hispanics are white.

When I 1st saw the Castro twins, before they were certified rising stars, the photo was black and white so I thought they were maybe Hmong.

On a later ABC News interview the reporter said back Julian's name to him in a deep Central American sort of accent (not slightly higher-pitched like the more common Mexican dialect). Julian replied back on how Texas was such a red state, etc. but he sounded like someone from AP Chemistry talking about the difference between new Nvidia and ATI graphics cards

Also, in the US, Hindus tend to be highly educated and that means... they came under the influence of a whole lot of leftist ideology from Jewish professors. And Hindus love pop culture, and pop culture is multi-culti and liberal and etc.

Another thing to remember is that a significant chunk of Indian-Americans are Muslim. The Republican Party's appeal to Muslims is, well, perhaps not zero, but mighty close.

Okay now, what about East Asians? Sizable population of Japanese and Koreans and a large population of Chinese. As far as first/second generation immigrants is concerned, I suspect they too vote in overwhelming majority for Democrats.

The core demographic of the Republican party instinctively dislikes the impulse to claim victimhood. They dislike it even when it comes from fellow whites. They think it's undignified, unmanly, kind of gay.

But claiming to be the bigger victim is the principal way in which people from extremely clannish cultures think and talk about politics. This comes instinctively to them. India has always been a very clannish place.

The mode of political thought that comes most naturally to Indians is distasteful to the core Republican demographic. There is a mismatch here.

If Polish jokes originated in Europe (doubtful) it must have been Germany. Germans are the only people who both had extensive contact with Poles and had reasons to look down on them. I can guarantee that Polish jokes are totally unknown anywhere to the east or south of Poland.

On a related note. I am a Jew who grew up in the old country. Growing up, I heard a lot of jokes that Jews tell to each other; humorous songs too. Can't remember a single joke about dumb goys. The closest I can think of were jokes about a Jew who cleverly told off an Antisemite. Maybe the old time Jews were isolated or whatever, but nearly all actual Jewish are about Jews. In fact, some of them would be called antisemitic if told in modern America.

The key to understanding how Asians of all varieties vote is that, even though they come from cultures that are socially conservative, these same cultures are also highly corrupt. Which is more likely to respond favorably to a few $thousand in baksheesh; a Republican or a Democrat?

In my experience, Indians that are Americanized or first generation are uber status conscious, go for fashion and bling, and like all the worst pop culture trash. Naturally in the era of the Great Celebrity President they vote Obama. Similarly they turned against Bush because he became so uncool.

Generally they don't know jack about politics, but their Cool Radar is flawless.

The notion that South or East Asians on net benefit from the affirmative action complex is laughable. Whatever pitiful spoils they might get from a few government contracts here and there they pay for 100 times over in college and grad school admission."

Right. Indians and Pakistanis just really, really love running gas-stations, motels, and liquor stores. The seeming lock that they have in those businesses in many parts of the country couldn't possibly have anything to do with them getting SBA loans on very favorable terms.

"Nikki Haley and Jindal are deeply disliked in the Indian community as apostates and the dumb Republicans seem to think that race matters for Indians - not

Religion is more important than race for Indians. There are Hindus who look yellow, black, brown and almost white."

Republicans attacked Nikki Haley for her religious background

Neither Jindal or Haley would have been elected on the Republican ticket if they had not converted."

I'm inclined to agree. I've not known many (maybe not any) whites who had any serious animus about Indians (unless they had unhappy experiences in the progamming world.) Indians are not seen as dangerous or worsening the quality of life, and their cuisine is quite popular. There's also a certain respect for what westerners think is Indian culture. People pretend to respect the African "cultures"; but they really don't. I know that is controversial. If we scrap the idea that there's any reason to consider the entire Indian subcontinent as a billion victims of unsuspecting Americans, I think our problems are solved.

All of the people who claim that Jews et al. don't vote Republican on account of Christianity are wrong. Jews were liberal democrats long before the evangelicals became a force in the Republican party circa 1980. Indeed, at the same time the evangelicals became players in the GOP, the Neocons were gaining influence over GOP foreign policy in the '80s.

Yeah it's Whites against Non-Whites in the political arena, and will be for the foreseeable future. Someday, when Whites have fallen in numbers to a truly minority status, there may be coalitions with other groups, but not now.

It's not even a possibility. There is zero point to trying "win over South Asians". It is a pipe dream. Race matters people. And Whites are different then other groups. For now, the interests of all non-Whites are pretty much aligned due to factors we cannot change.

"The christian fundamentalism of the Republican Party is a huge turnoff to most Indian-Americans."

Exactly, I've been told as much by Indian-Americans who see the Democrats at every level of government as more tolerate of minority religions than Republicans.The whole war on terror didn't help because TSA officers (and the general public for that matter) appear to be a little hazy on the differences between Hindus and Muslims.

The problem the GOP has is that their economic policy is so cartoonishly dumb (Bill Clinton's DNC speech was the best speech he ever gave mainly because, for once, the facts were on his side) that stressing religious conservatism is the only way they can hold working class white voters.

A little too late, the Republican shot callers are waking up to the corner they've painted themselves in. Seemingly out of the blue, GOP moneyman David Koch just told a reporter he supported gay marriage, legalized marijuana, cutting defense spending and raising taxes. http://www.mediaite.com/online/david-koch-supports-gay-marriage-pot-legalization-and-ending-wars-and-you-shouldnt-be-surprised/

Taking away the minority benefits for South Asians would only affect those who need those business loans, such as some of the Patels who could still get cheap loans from the caste network

Per the 2012 Pew report, 57% of Hindus have post graduate education vs 34% for Jews and 16% for white Christians, and mostly dont go for the small business loans. Removing these loans would have minimal effect

Classifying Indians as caucasian would help Indians get into college. It is easier to get into college as white than as Asian

As expected, Swati Dandekar of the Democratic Party was elected from the 36th district to the Iowa state assembly, making her the first Indian American woman to be elected to a legislative body in the United States.

The 51-year-old Nagpur-born Dandekar got 6,727 votes (57 per cent of the total cast) as against 4,983 (43 per cent) for her opponent Karen Balderston, a farmer and substitute teacher. She is the fourth Indian American to be elected to a state assembly.

The last days of the campaign witnessed allegations from Dandekar's opponent, even making India's caste system an issue. Balderston questioned Dandekar's ethnicity and her qualifications to contest in this Mid-Western state.

"While I was growing up in Iowa, learning and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, Swati was growing up in India, under the still existent caste system. How can that prepare her for legislating in Iowa or any other part of our great United States?" Balderston wrote in an emai

Controversy touched the senator again in 2006. In November of that year Satveer Chaudhary was re-elected to the Senate. Upon the victory his opponent, Republican Rae Hart Anderson, sent Chaudhary a concession email that said, "The race of your life is more important than this one--and it is my sincere wish that you'll get to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.".[34] Chaudhary chose to ignore the comment.

That's the question being raised by the Republican challenger to sitting Gov. Steve Beshear, a Democrat, who participated in a Hindu "ground blessing" ceremony Friday for a manufacturing plant operated by an India-based company.

The Republican, David Williams -- who was trailing Beshear by 29 percentage points in a recent poll -- has decided there was something untoward about it.

"To get down and get involved and participate in prayers to these polytheistic situations, where you have these Hindu gods that they are praying to, doesn't appear to me to be in line with what a governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky ought to be doing," Williams said, according to the Lexington Herald-Leader.

Williams added: "He's sitting down there with his legs crossed, participating in Hindu prayers with a dot on his forehead with incense burning around him. I don't know what the man was thinking."

WallBuilders president David Barton is questioning why the U.S. government is seeking the invocation of a non-monotheistic god. Barton points out that since Hindus worship multiple gods, the prayer will be completely outside the American paradigm, flying in the face of the American motto “One Nation Under God.”

-

David Barton served several terms as the vice chairman of the Republican Party of Texas. He’s representative of the Reconstructionist/Theocratic extreme wing of the party–a very vocal segment.

It might be a class thing. Wealthy, cosmopolitan urbanites in the US tend to be Democrats so Indian-Americans want to emulate winners. There may also be the perception that the GOP is a party for army-loving white Christian college football fans they have a lot less in common with.

Small businessmen are one of the main backbones of the Republican Party, except in places like Chicago where they are co-opted into the Democratic machine. Another big source of Republican elites are doctors.

Okay, so Indians tend to have jobs like Republicans but vote like Puerto Ricans.

"Bullshit. Asians make up about 30% of the Harvard student body. They do better than whites financially and professionally, but not in the same ratio that whites do better than blacks. The Forbes 400 is about 55-60% non-Jewish white, and only 0.25% black (Oprah). But Harvard is perhaps only 30% non-Jewish white and ~6% black."

It's amazing that at the core blog of the HBD community people can be so ignorant about the basics of racial differences in test scores.

Say this with me, Asians have 15 higher IQ points than gentile whites. Gentile whites are a cognitively inferior race.

If it wasn't for affirmative action Harvard would be 80%+ Asian. It's well documented that Asians get screwed by affirmative action at universities.

"That's odd. I'm an atheist Republican and I don't feel the least bit scared. What has you peeing your pants? "

How about their continual insistence on spending all of their political capital fighting abortion. The one remaining sanctioned form of eugenics still practiced by Western civilization. Pretty much the only thing stopping the gene pool from turning into a cesspoool.

As an atheist you should recognize that God really has no plans for those future hooligan miscreants that are currently thankfully vacuumed out of the womb in the second trimester at astronomical rates.

Indians are very race conscious.Although they look down at blacks, they realise that the USA was the 'white man's country' and that they are very much dark skinned outsiders in a society that could possibly turn hostile. So they intuit it is in their best interests to vote for the party that subjugates white men and elevates dark skinned races.

I struggle to put this nicely, but this is wrong, and is recognizable as wrong even without knowledge of modern genomics. Straw-manning aside, physical anthropologists had, by the 20th century, intuited schema much more nuanced and much more correct than the platonic triangularity of the three-race concept.

The dominant figure of 20th century anthropology was arguably Carleton Coon and he proposed 5 races: Mongoloids, Caucasoids, Australoids, Congoids, and Capoids. All I’m doing is simplifying things by lumping Coon’s last 3 races into a single category (Negroids) and thus resurrecting the 3 race system of old.

South Asians are a highly admixed set of populations with substantial ancestry from the aboriginal and ingressive pre-IE populations of the subcontinent, who were extremely distinct from any European population.

No one’s 100% pure. They’re still far more Caucasoid than anything else.

North Africans, Middle Easterners, and others in your "non-white caucasoid" category have, to varying extents and in conformity with historical-geographic expectations, minor to substantial Sub-Saharan African, South Asian, and (in Turkic, Caucasus, and some Iranian Plateau peoples) East Eurasian ancestry.

Again, no one’s 100% pure. I suppose you could invoke the one drop rule and say they’re not white, but I never claimed even PURE Middle Easterners or South Asians are white. I explicitly define them as non-white caucasoids (NWCs).

To my eye Australian aborigines and even kinky-haired Melanesians are only superficially negroid-like (you might see what I mean if you compare Papuan and South African albinos).

Australoid skulls are classified as negroid. See this article about a forensic artist who concludes that a skull was australoid because “it has all the features of a negroid face”:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/430944.stm

“At any rate they're genetically sister to East Eurasians, though much more distantly than Amerindians are, with probable affinities to at least some negrito peoples in Southeast and South Asia.”

As for that remark about "junk DNA" (sic) ... I'm not sure you really understand what that term means, but you should know that there's no real justification for dismissing genetic findings about Australomelanesian distinctness from SSAs as a weird fluke obscuring the actual tree.

Australomelanesians are distinct from SSAs only because they have been living outside sub-Saharan Africa much longer than any other non-SSA people and thus have accumulated extreme genetic distance from SSAs in JUNK DNA which is ironic because they are the one non-African race who by remaining genetically isolated in climates similar to SSA’s, preserved the African phenotype, and thus I consider australoid to be the non-African branch of the negroid family tree.

There’re many Indian small biz owners (convenient shops and cheap motels ? just like the other side of the Atlantics) is because of their limited IQ potential and free riding on large minority loans,

There’re more Indian doctors in America is primarily due to selective immigration on top of Indian cultural emphasis.

Both of them are “artificial”, not natural/typical Republic jobs.

Remove minority statue freebies AND selective Immigration AND professional bias for the “upper” caste, you’ll then see the truth about Indians.

The single most important HBD issue related to America however, and the single most under-investigated & discussed issue everywhere in the HBD world IMO, is Mean Reversion!! ---- the `Holy Grail` of America’s HBD future.

The sad foreseeable future prospect that even already-highly selected 120 IQ doctor - convenient shops owner parents WILL produce offspring , on average, of third world IQ (even on top of due Flynn points) will have much more far-reaching impact on Republicans and America. No amount of more fresh-of-boat 120 IQ doctors and motel owners then would compensate the net loss of vastly larger lower IQ base of offspring of previous comers (together with large amount of not so `selective` economic dependents).

Indians by and large are a mix amongst Astraloid(India's vast original base), Cacausoid(middle eastern stock invaders) and some Mongoloid invaders, thus exhibiting many characteristics of of all major races.

The handful mega stars of Bollywood (almost all from Pakistan, Afghanistan by origin) and most highyly selected upper caste doctors immigrated to the West, the face of India in the world actually, are not white but a variety(not pure)of Middle Easten stock.

Indians is not as diverse as what most people think.

Actually Indians are quite homogeneous, despite some minor skin tone differences btw the South and the North - from dark, to dark brown to lighter brown, all brown nonetheless.

Indians are homogeneous at a subcontinental level.

That's why with simple facial recognition one almost never mistaken an Indian from a White European or an East Asian, or a typical Sub-sahara Congoids(ok, sometimes, due to many Indian's heavy admixture of Astraloid, even by a 12-year-old. Isn't that very telling already?

Our Jewish friends in med school and in business school told us the road to Power in America was through the Democratic Party. We have not had reason to mistrust their tutelage, yet.

20-25% of Reagan's soft money came from Indian-American physicians - but Reagan had a broader and more uplifting vision of America than the current crop of Republicans. There is only ONE Indian-American doctor who has raised more than a million bucks for Romney.

"The Negroid race can be subdivided into 3 main sub races: congoids, capoids, and australoids (yes I realize australoids have lived out of Africa for tens of thousands of years and accumulated differences in junk DNA, but they preserve the Negroid phenotype)"

This is not true, scientists I've read consider Australoids closer to whites than blacks.

I think South Asia is similar to Latin America in that you've essentially got two races, Aryan (related to Europeans and Middle Easterners) and Dravidians (related to Melanesians and Aborigines) which have mixed in varying degrees. Some look as white as southern Europeans and some are extremely dark. I know a blonde American woman who married a light upper class Indian and had a child and his family is thrilled. I think they very much like the idea of whitening up the family gene pool.

I hope you realize that most Hindus be they American or Indian dont regard Christian or Muslim converts as "apostate" as there is no such thing as apostasy in Hinduism!

To be sure there are lot of evangelicals who spew venom against other religions but then they dont too highly of Catholics either!

I think much of the affinity of Indians to Democrats is yes open borders...In their naivete ,they think this would somehow help their cause when in reality it would turn America into the kind of culture that they were escaping from.

Here somethign that these idiot Indian Americans should realize...they have come to American to escape from Indians....and live among whites....its really that simple.

But tired tropes of colonialism(though U.S was very hostile to the British presence in India) ,guilt over ditching the motherlandand trendy anti whiteness compel them to spew such nonense.

And this explains their support for Obama despite his fondness for economic protectionism, hostility to outsourcing as well as his jokes in the 208 primary about Hillary being the Senator for Punjab or Biden making Indian 7-11 jokes.

To hell with them...as an Indian I say close the borders except for the occasional college student(no visa extensions for work please) and a 10 year wait for a green card in case of marriage to an American.

Do the above and watch both Indian and Indian Americans come to their senses(after pouting and thrashing of course)

Um, not really. No sign of that in the UK, anyway. In the US, Arabs probably have more cultural influence than south-Asians."

I dont quite see how you figure that!Most Arab Americans can pass off as white especially Lebanese and Palestinian Americans such Mitch Daniels,Ralph Nader,John Abi Zaid,Tony Shalhoub,William Peter Blatty and John Sunnunu

It also helps that they are Christians so that makes the transition even easier.

The only Arab cultural influence is the institutions that are bought and paid for by the Saudis.To be sure that is quite formidable whose tentacles(get it?) stretch froma academia,media,state governments all the way to the White House.

Some Arab Americans among CAIR do their bidding but the vast majority have nothing to do with them.

All said and done, I doubt Hindus are the new Jews because ,apart from outliers such as Jindal and Haley ,they really arent that interested in politics and despite their impressive academic credentials are quite ill informed on political matters.Again this explains their fondness for Obama.

Indian Americans support Obama is just an aspect of their wannabe SWPLism.

"it is my sincere wish that you'll get to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior."

Rec1man, you come from a place where there are regular religious-themed riots ("communal violence") in which hundreds of people die at a time. And yet you make a point of being offended at the above words. This is what I meant when I talked about the love of victimhood.

Funny, the hinduism of Indians is a huge turn-off to many christian Americans."

LOL, I dont know if they know much of it to be turned off.The difference is that apart from fraudulent gurus who can easily be avoided, Hindus are forbidden from converting others to their faith.Christians are a different matter.It is mostly attempts at conversion that irritates Hindus.

Perhaps those indians should go back to their own country, instead of trying to change ours."

How exactly is the lukewarm preference non preferance of one American political party over another by a pliant religious minority an attempt at single handedly changing the country?

I hope you realize its white SWPLs,World Council of Churches, Episcopelians, hardline Catholics and what have you(all of whom are overwhelmingly) not to mention both liberal and Orthodox Jews work overtime to undermine white evangelicals far more than Hindus!

I also don't think Borat was aimed at poles because their anti-semitism has always been low compared to their neighbors, which is why Poland had the highest Jewish percentage in the world before WWII. "

That would be news to Polish born Menachem Begin said that Poles imbibe anti Semitism through their mothers milk

>>>Um, not really. No sign of that in the UK, anyway. In the US, Arabs probably have more cultural influence than south-Asians.

1. The UK is irrelevant globally.

2. Despite having an Empire, and a most anal caste classification scheme in your tiresome Indian "censuses", you selected very badly among South Asian populations for immigration - mainly Sylehtis, Kashmiris and Muslim Jats.

All of the people who claim that Jews et al. don't vote Republican on account of Christianity are wrong. Jews were liberal democrats long before the evangelicals became a force in the Republican party circa 1980. Indeed, at the same time the evangelicals became players in the GOP, the Neocons were gaining influence over GOP foreign policy in the '80s.

This comment reminds me of another comment on this blog a week ago. People were saying blacks wouldn't vote republican because of all the racists rednecks, similar to people here writing that Christian republicans turn off Jews and others. But as was pointed out, democrats under FDR included the most racist, segregationists in America, and yet blacks were solidly behind FDR and the democrats because they were and still are the party of big government, and blacks continue to support the party of big government.

Likewise Jews generally support the party of the left, and the democrats are the party of the left. So Jews will continue to support them. Any excuses they make involving the republicans being too Christian are probably just their way of not admitting how leftwing they really are.

Good point, what also might attractive time to Democratic is that Hindus tend to be more pacifists. People mention about Japanese being Democratic too, alot ot of Japanese intermarried and those that intermarried are less so Democratic. There is a 22 year old mayor Republican of Placenta Ca who is half-white and half Japanese. Asians intermarry with whites about 30 percent versus about 20 percent with Hispanics, so actually the Republicans could do slightly better in the future with Asians since they will become more whiter faster than the brown skin Spanish speakers.

Well Christianity doesn't make you Republican either. Jim Wallis who is more religious than you average Republican is pretty far too the left. There is a growing social gospel among the younger evangelicals. Evangelicals tend to be republicans since southern whites don't like a lot of government in economics compared to northern whites and the social issues which actually the Catholics in the 1970's brought up to evangelicals like Gay Marriage and Abortion. In fact many Evangelicals prior to the 1970's were neutral on abortion and some supported it until the Roman Catholic conservatives changed their minds. Granted, the social issues are apart of a religious view but some people like Jim Wallis use a lot of passages in the bible that lead you to a social gospel. Also, white Roman Catholics are split between the parties-Republican and Democratic and Eastern Orthodox a small group are more likely to be Democratic and some of them spend 3 hours standing in church services are Sunday.

Well, Cubans are not strong Roman Catholics are probably attend mass no better than whites. Its the communism that makes then Republican not religion. Same goes for the Vietnamese that are only 33 percent Christian and mainly Roman Catholic. Anti-communism again. Same for the Russians, granted protestant Russians more so than Eastern Orthodox and most Russians are Eastern Orthodox and are more likely to vote Democratic. But the Protestant ones its also Eastern Orthodox

The notion that socially conservative Indians will vote Republican is as stupid as the notion that socially conservative blacks or Hispanics or Jews will vote Republican. All these people vote Democrat precisely because they are socially conservative - and the thing they want to conserve is very emphatically NOT the historical America. It's themselves as they previously existed.

If they were socially liberal in the true meaning of the term they'd be a lot more likely to vote Republican i.e. to assimilate to the American norm. But to be a socially conservative Indian, Jew, etc is to repudiate any and all suggestions that you ought to be just like your white semi-Christian neighbor.

Socially conservative minority groups always see themselves as locked in a struggle with the majority. Even if, as in America, the majority bears minorities no ill will and only wants to be liked.

We have a big stereotypes that Southern Whites don't have a BA that are evangelical Christians. In fact in the South the richest white people were more devoted to their evangelical religion and finished college. Plano Texas had higher income than Portland Oregon. And has about the same number of people that finished college, people here tend to buy into the Democratic lie, actually poorer whites tend to vote Democratic mainly women that had children out of wedlock.

The problem the GOP has is that their economic policy is so cartoonishly dumb (Bill Clinton's DNC speech was the best speech he ever gave mainly because, for once, the facts were on his side)

I'm always surprised by the amount of hard-core lefties who read and comment on this site.

But of course, racialism is not something they find to be uncongenial - it's practically a core belief for them. Even if their racialism is explicitly anti-white.

The economic fact is that the policies of the Democratic party have bankrupted the country. Their "tax the rich" rhetoric is boob bait for their idiotic members: No amount of taxing the rich can balance America's books.

Do Southern Republicans just only have high school and are lower middle class? Here's an interesting stats for the US census: San Francisco median household income 71,304, poverty rate 11.9 and Ba 51.2. Plano Texas median household income 81,822 poverty rate 6.7 and BA 54.0. Granted, there are liberal cities above the San Fran average and conservative cities below the Plano Texas but a lot of heavily districts in the South that are Republican sometimes have higher incomes than cities in the north that vote Democratic. Texas overall has less income than California because it has the same amount of Hispanics and almost double the rate of blacks. Texas is around 11.8 percent black while California is only 6.5 percent black.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the 9-11 effect on Indian voting patterns. Indians suspect that White Conservative Christians (I.e. Republican voters) can't be bothered to learn the difference between brown-skinned Hindus and Sikhs, and brown-skinned Muslims. They just see them all as brown-skinned people who want to blow them up. What happened in Wisconsin only confirms the fears of most all Indians of any religion. I really think this has a lot to do with why Indians vote Democrat.

"Say this with me, Asians have 15 higher IQ points than gentile whites. Gentile whites are a cognitively inferior race. "The above joke is hardly worth responding to, but here goes. They are not "15 points" above. You have them mixed up with Jews--and even concerning Jews, it's ridiculous. The Japanese averaged 109, but so did Poles and Dutch. The Chinese averaged 105. But so did several other European nationalities. The average IQ of 100 results from a composite of European-dominant countries. The average IQ for whites is 100. For northeast Asian, about 105. For Indians, its in the 80s, although those living in England have averaged in the high 90s.

"Say this with me, Asians have 15 higher IQ points than gentile whites. Gentile whites are a cognitively inferior race."

Are you trying to hypnotize us?No, they do not have IQs "15 points higher than white gentiles." Unless you are speaking about the miniscule number of Asians who get into places like Harvard, compared with the generality of whites. In any case, inventors can hardly be inferior to the users of their inventors. The created are not the equals of the creators. I'd list the catalog of white achievements these brilliant Asians are using (why, if they're so brilliant, do they not remain in their own countries and make their own Harvards?). If we depended on these superior Asians, we'd still be at, oh, maybe China 500 yrs ago. Very nice porcelain and lots of fireworks though.

Now that's interesting, but what is even more interesting is why the demonstrably cognitively superior people have always been so hot to get into the countries and institutions of such demonstrably inferior people, instead of just building what would necessarily be superior ones for themselves. That way they wouldn't have to worry about white prejudice or the presence of pesky white trash at all.

Indian Americans are the most powerful backers of India's conservative party. The immigrants are mostly upper castes, which usually vote conservative back home. The real reasons for most Indian Americans turning Democrat:

1. Pop culture/MSM - that's where they get their idea of America from. All leftist strongholds.

2. Republican kowtowing to Christianity - Arguments based on God and the Bible obviously dont work on them and merely accentuate their minority consciousness.

First generation Indian Americans are otherwise actually quite Right-wing:1. Most hate gays and gay marriage.2. Very pro family.3. They uniformly hate Muslims and love Israel. Ergo Indians love America.4. They despise Blacks and Mexicans.5. They despise Affirmative Action (India has 50% quotas, and most Indian Americans here fled from those quotas).6. They are wealthy and don't want to pay tax (though it is not a major issue)

I dont see anything changing in the near future though. Christians are a much larger voting block for the GOP and it makes no sense to ditch them for a 1% minority vote.

Steve, the whole point of Male Jewish over-achievement (women among Jews only succeeded like the late Firestone lady feminist whose first name I am too lazy to Google by being more uber-radical than thou) ... was beating the jock-man-of-action model with nebbishy smarts and wisecracks.

Think comic books. A whole lot of them. Smart guys who were not going to be the star running back or other type of "big man." That pretty much accounts for Jewish success in the US North East circa 1900-1955. As an intellectual, monetary, and cultural force they are now played out. Lacking the hunger, energy, and determination to succeed.

Think on how many game-changing companies have been founded by Jews since 1955. Compared to Warners, MGM, Marvel, DC, etc. there has not been a lot; Apple, Microsoft, even Linux have been the province of non-Jews, White guys who were smart and driven and could not be the "Big Man" ... not even Steve Jobs and his reality distortion field.

If you want to leverage that sort of energy AND AMBITION you're better off looking for the Jimmy Kimmel types -- smart guys who can't play jock, and have ambition, and are by definition "locked out" of the current aristocracy which is soft-hereditarian.

I doubt that Wikipedia is a reliable souce for the origin of Polish Jokes.

As I remember it there were no Polish jokes in the fifties at all. There were a lot of ethnic jokes about Negroes but none about the English or the Poles. There were some Italian jokes - called Dago jokes at the time - and maybe a few other groups but no jokes about Poles.

First of all, Poles were obscure. The first time I heard about a Polish joke I was dumbfounded. The only Polish references I was familiar with were Chopin, a line in Boris Gudanov's first act monolog, and Reverse Polish Notation (RPN). It seemed to my young mind that Poles were just innoucuous musicians and mathematicians with an particularly unlucky geography.

I concluded that they had been picked by some shadowy molders of public thought as a target exactly because no one had a grievance against them. That was my conspiracy theory receptor firing up for the first time.

Sometime in the sixties suddenly everyone was talking about Polish jokes as if they had long existed and clearly demonstrated some moral point about ethnic biases. It was all too neat. But it worked. Ethnic humor abruptly died.

I would like some scholar to study this. I presumed at the time that some group like perhaps the Southern Poverty Law Center created the idea of the Polish Joke to kill off the Coon Jokes of the day. It would be nice to really know.

It's amazing that at the core blog of the HBD community people can be so ignorant about the basics of racial differences in test scores.

Say this with me, Asians have 15 higher IQ points than gentile whites. Gentile whites are a cognitively inferior race.

First of all this discussion is about South Asians by which we mean Indians most of whom are conventionally considered Caucasians. This reference seems to be to East Asians (Han Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans). Confusing.

Europe is only a continent by convention. It is just the western end of Asia. So you could with equal justice call Caucasians - West Asians. Then you could call almost everybody an Asian. That would not be much of a contribution to clarity I'm afraid.

But the main problem with this comment however is that it is flat out wrong.

According to Lynn the smartest city is Hong Kong. The smartest nation is South Korea. Japan is second. But the East Asian advantage is quite small over West Germans, Swedes or British. The biggest difference is that the Asians do better on the quantitaive subtests and Westerners do better on the verbal sections. Terman and Wechsler set the mean western verbal score equal to the mean quantitative score. So an average raw score in the SAT or GRE for examlp[le is set at 500.

So since Westerners do better on the verbal sections we could just adjust the weightings to make verbal ability more important than quantitative ability and Voilá Caucasions are smarter than Asians.

Let me illustrate. Let's say that average raw score on the verbal section for whites is 76. That would be set to 500. Similarly an average white non-verbal score might be 122. That would also be set to 500. Asians would have a different pattern. Let's say the average Asian verbal raw score is 70 and the average non-verbal is 130. Using the white standardization that might be something like 450 Verbal and 560 Non-Verbal for the Asians. The Asians would come out a little higher on the combined scores.

But let's say I decided that verbal ability was more important and I weighted it 600-400 or 700-300 rather than 500-500. Then the whites would have a higher combined score.

There is no such adjustment that can be made for blacks. They do badly on all sections of these tests. But Caucasians are slightly superior to Asians on verbal subtests and Asians are rather more superior on the non-verbal. When you weight both set of subtests to be the same Asians come out a little smarter. When you weigh them to favor verbal skills you favor whites.

In fact we do something like this already. Engineering students are judged by different criteria than law students. In general as you would expect there are lots of Chinese engineers, software developers, and such but not nearly as many lawyers. Asians are better quantitatively and Westerners are better qualitatively.

Being highly educated means voting Dem in this day and age. If Asian Indians are drawn from the cream of the 1-billion-strong crop, they'll vote Dem.

Being non-European may be a factor, although somehow I suspect that the limited number of white immigrants we do get -- we get about 100,000/yr, which is actually not negligible, even if most of our intake is Latino and Asian -- still vote Dem.

If Polish jokes originated in Europe (doubtful) it must have been Germany. Germans are the only people who both had extensive contact with Poles and had reasons to look down on them. I can guarantee that Polish jokes are totally unknown anywhere to the east or south of Poland.

On a related note. I am a Jew who grew up in the old country. Growing up, I heard a lot of jokes that Jews tell to each other; humorous songs too. Can't remember a single joke about dumb goys. The closest I can think of were jokes about a Jew who cleverly told off an Antisemite. Maybe the old time Jews were isolated or whatever, but nearly all actual Jewish are about Jews. In fact, some of them would be called antisemitic if told in modern America.

I'd have to agree. Polish jokes lack the subtlety characteristic of Jewish humor, which tends to highlight the contradictions between reality and what we believe. Polish jokes have the subtlety of a sledgehammer, and are jokes even a three-year-old might understand.

Sailer wants to classify Indians as "Caucasians", and yet the average Sailer reader isn't even willing to admit that Indians are "Caucasoids". The idea that swarthy, hairy Arabs and - even worse - the pagan darkies of the subcontinent could have shared ancestry with white Europeans is too much to bear.

Reminds of the debate here a few weeks ago, about whether most American whites even really accept the Italians, Lebanese, and Greeks as truly one of their own.

I'm not sure having more Hindus on the Democratic side will be all that advantageous to liberals. For one thing, most Americans don't like Asians. Sure, Americans like to laugh at Babu on SIMPSONS and can find some Hindu stuff funny, but Americans don't like-like Asians. They just enjoy some Asians as stereotypes: Suzie Wong, funny 7-11 store owner, kung fu master, yogi mystic, etc.

Also, Americans are driven somewhat by 'guilt' when it comes to Jews and blacks. Americans feel no such feeling toward Asians. And when Americans see a lot of successful ASian-INdians, they feel resentful.

"the pagan darkies of the subcontinent could have shared ancestry with white Europeans is too much to bear."

Shut up, you pale-assed, milk-faced dork. There is nothing wrong with Hindus as long as they don't eat too much curry and speak funny. Most Hindus are a-okay--though I certainly wouldn't want the West to be filled up with them. I find nothing wrong with darker skin per se. I'd rather like a dark-skinned Sean Connery than a light-skinned Negro. A whole lot of blacks actually have lighter skin than Asian INdians, but Asian Indians make better neighbors.

"But Caucasians are slightly superior to Asians on verbal subtests and Asians are rather more superior on the non-verbal. When you weight both set of subtests to be the same Asians come out a little smarter. When you weigh them to favor verbal skills you favor whites."

http://www.fathersmanifesto.net/sat.htm

"If it wasn't for affirmative action Harvard would be 80%+ Asian. It's well documented that Asians get screwed by affirmative action at universities."

it's probably hyperbole but in case it's not, NO.and acceptance rate doesn't automatically reveals discrimination, if asians are selectively applying to more selective schools or where asians congregate then they will have lower acceptance rate.Then there's the simpson's paradox, if you look it up on wikipedia you can find an example relevant to this.Unless the med school selections differ drastically from other colleges.

Many Asians-Indians vote Democratic cuz of market forces. Many work in wholesale and retail, and more government spending means more Negroes, Hispanics, and white trash will have more money to spend. So, even if a Hindu-American businessman may look down on welfare leeches, he makes a good portion of his money from welfare leeches. So, the more money that the government pumps into bottom levels of society, more profits are made by Hindu-American businessmen who own small businesses.

"It's amazing that at the core blog of the HBD community people can be so ignorant about the basics of racial differences in test scores. Say this with me, Asians have 15 higher IQ points than gentile whites. Gentile whites are a cognitively inferior race."

Heh. Not even Asians in this country, who have been specifically selected for education/intelligence, average 15 points higher than whites. The Indians left back in India can't even manage an average IQ of 90.

And the Asians in this country have another thing going for them having nothing to do with IQ - work ethic. The American work ethic has gone to hell, coddled as it has been by wealth and consumerism.

"How about their continual insistence on spending all of their political capital fighting abortion. The one remaining sanctioned form of eugenics still practiced by Western civilization. Pretty much the only thing stopping the gene pool from turning into a cesspooo"

Excuse me? Abortion isn't good eugenics. Steve has covered this in years past. Abortion doesn't cull the herd of the irresponsible. It allows those who are responsible to cull themselves.

"Say this with me, Asians have 15 higher IQ points than gentile whites. Gentile whites are a cognitively inferior race. "The above joke is hardly worth responding to, but here goes. They are not "15 points" above. You have them mixed up with Jews--and even concerning Jews, it's ridiculous. The Japanese averaged 109, but so did Poles and Dutch. The Chinese averaged 105. But so did several other European nationalities. The average IQ of 100 results from a composite of European-dominant countries. The average IQ for whites is 100. For northeast Asian, about 105. For Indians, its in the 80s, although those living in England have averaged in the high 90s.

Whites might be almost as smart as East Asians, but the ENTIRE Caucasoid race (of which whites are only a minority) is MUCH less intelligent than the ENTIRE Mongoloid race (of which East Asians are a majority).

I don't think in terms of whites, East Asians, Jews, Arabs, Indians etc.

At my level one sees the big picture; only three races: the new and improved Mongoloids (genetic IQ 105) the ancient and primitive negroids (genetic IQ 80), and the intermediate caucasoids (genetic IQ 94)

The ranking of the three races in everything from brain size (mongoloids highest) to sexual anatomy (negroids highest) has to do with the time period when each of these groupings branched off the main trunk of the evolutionary tree: negroids first, followed by caucasoids, and finally the new and improved Mongoloids.

Among the Mongoloids, Hong Kongoids are the brightest (IQ 110) and Native Americans are the dullest (genetic IQ around 90), but because East Asains so outnumber Amerindians, the overall mongoloid mean is 105.

Among caucasoids, Ashkenazi are the brightest (IQ 110), Roma are the dullest (genetic IQ probably 80), with an overall caucasoid mean around 95. Ashkenazis have a lot of genetic diseases caused by centuries of artifiticial selection for intelligence; perhaps natures way of saying no Caucasoid people is meant to have a mean IQ as high as the superior Mongoloids.

In last place are the negroids. Almost all of these are congoids who have a genetic IQ of 80. The two other negroid types (capoids genetic IQ 67 and australoids genetic IQ 70) are too small in population to lower the overall Negroid genetuc mean from 80 (90 for mulattoes)

Did anybody mention abortion on this thread? Indians like to knock off a female fetus whenever that little problem shows up. Imagine having to drive all the way to Canada to kill your daughter. Dems support of abortion must be quite important to Indian voters.

Whites might be almost as smart as East Asians, but the ENTIRE Caucasoid race (of which whites are only a minority) is MUCH less intelligent than the ENTIRE Mongoloid race (of which East Asians are a majority).

Caucasoids wouldn't be MUCH less intelligent than mongoloids if Indians were excluded, since Indians have the lowest IQs and the largest population.

I really don't buy into the 3 race theory. A Scandinavian is too different from the typical Indian to belong to the same race. Indians are their own race....

All immigrants to America, even these "blacks of Asia", quickly learn that the easiest way to be tolerated by the white majority is to align with their fear and loathing of the black bogeyman."

I've heard that so often. I dated an Indian once (and I mean once.) He was quite brilliant in a British kind of way, and acted as a sort of sophisticated guru of a self-development program--ENEGRAM, or something like that. Since he let me know I was not evolved enough for him (disagreed too often), he cut me loose. Quite a relief he did it for me, because I had wanted to date someone really different, and was annoyed it wasn't gelling. That newcomers to America develop "prejudice" towards blacks because of whites. Are we really that influential? If only some of our other attitudes would rub off...No. They have "prejudice" towards blacks for exactly the same reasons whites have "prejudice"; meaning experience, or observation of others' experience. They also work with a lot of them in hospitals. Indians don't dislike blacks (and not all do, and like whites, do not dislike all blacks in any case) as a mimic of whites. They are too pragmatic.Some do identify with blacks and prefer them; but generally, Indians don't go for black neighborhoods, etc. They consider themselves quite distinct, despite superficial resemblances.

"I think South Asia is similar to Latin America in that you've essentially got two races, Aryan (related to Europeans and Middle Easterners) and Dravidians (related to Melanesians and Aborigines) which have mixed in varying degrees. Some look as white as southern Europeans and some are extremely dark. "

It differs in one crucial respect however - the southern Dravidians - the darker indigenes who were invaded, are probably the smarter ones, while the Indo-Aryans up north are relative dolts.

The epicentre of India's recent hi-tech transformation has been Dravidian-speaking areas of the south. The north remains far poorer on average.

In this respect India bears some resemblance to China, with most competent members of the population clustering further southwards.

"I have long been flummoxed by the Indian tendency to vote Dem, but the idea that they do so for minority bennies is utterly ludicrous."

Multi-culturalism and multi-racialism are just spin words for balkanization. It's simple tribalism - nothing complicated. The majority tribe at the moment is white therefore the minority tribes form an anti-majority coalition. That is all it is.

The only layer of complication is the majority tribe - while they are the majority and in proportion to how much of a majority thay are - will also split idealogically. This is like camouflage paint over a vehicle. It disguises the basic underlaying shape but the underlying shape isn't changed.

Once the process of balkanization hits the point where the majority tribe is on the cusp of losing majority status they will gradually start to vote tribally also - the way other ethnic groups do and always have - even if the party that supposedly represents them actually only represents Wall St.

As white people start to vote tribally - the way other ethnic groups do and always have - the GOP will either have to become a tribal party or be replaced.

However as they will have served their treachorous purpose no-one will mourn them.

"Someday, when Whites have fallen in numbers to a truly minority status, there may be coalitions with other groups, but not now."

Yes. A factory with black, white and asian and a white majority you get black and asian sitting at the same tables. If blacks are the majority you'd get white and asian sitting at the same tables. If asians were the majority you'd get black and white sitting at the same tables.

"Say this with me, Asians have 15 higher IQ points than gentile whites. Gentile whites are a cognitively inferior race."

Then no doubt the increasing displacement of white people will result in ever-increasing prosperity and not a collapse into 3rd world poverty? If you believe in that bet you should put all your money in the stock market.

"How about their continual insistence on spending all of their political capital fighting abortion."

The Republicans focus their efforts on social issues because they are owned by and represent Wall St. and so their economic policy is designed solely for the benefit of Wall St. The focus on social issues is not stupidity. It is a smokescreen.

Admittedly their voters are too stupid - or too trusting - to notice the scam but the Republican party is doing exactly what it needs to do to give its donors what they want - unlimited amounts of cheap labor.

Small businessmen are one of the main backbones of the Republican Party, except in places like Chicago where they are co-opted into the Democratic machine. Another big source of Republican elites are doctors.

Doctors are in effect small businessmen. Anyway, I was wondering if more men end up in small business because women now take up so many of the good paying corporate jobs. Women will stay home or go on welfare before they will pour concrete or swing a hammer, but they are more than happy to sit in an office cubicle than have some beta support his family with that job. So, do small businessmen kind of get pushed into starting their own businesses because the job market is tighter and they don't have it in them to sit worthlessly on their rears?

"I think South Asia is similar to Latin America in that you've essentially got two races, Aryan (related to Europeans and Middle Easterners) and Dravidians (related to Melanesians and Aborigines) which have mixed in varying degrees. Some look as white as southern Europeans and some are extremely dark. "

Actually I think Dravidians are Caucasoid:

The Dravidians, also Caucasian but originally from the Middle East, ie warmer areas than the Aryans, had from about 6000 BC themselves largely displaced the original aboriginal inhabitants. Since the ancestors of the latter had passed through no significantly colder regions on their way from Africa along the ocean littoral to India, they exhibited characteristics not much changed from those of their African forebears : very dark or black skins, low average IQ (no higher than about 70) etc.

There was though some interbreeding to the extent that in about 3000 BC the original inhabitants contributed about 25% of the gene pool of India. Michael H Hart suggests that as a result of the influx of the higher IQ Caucasoid Dravidians, the mean IQ of India rose by about 11 points. (‘Understanding Human History’, Washington Summit Publishers 2007, p269). Tribes which are probably remnants of the original aborigine population survive in remote areas of India.

I actually like that three-race hybrid model. Except I'd make it a five race model. The core five are:A. NegroidB. AustraloidC. CaucasoidD. MongoloidE. Amerid

Most everyone else is a mixture of two of the five:BC = Indians (especially the Dravidians)DB = Southeast Asians and PolynesiansCD = Central Asians / Turkic typesAC = New World MulattoesCE = Mestizo Hispanics

Did anybody mention abortion on this thread? Indians like to knock off a female fetus whenever that little problem shows up. Imagine having to drive all the way to Canada to kill your daughter. Dems support of abortion must be quite important to Indian voters.

Interesting point that no one recognizes as one of the possible reasons for indian-americans support for the pro-abortion Democrats.

Female foeticide and infanticide is a big issue among hindus and sikhs. Women are valued less in hindu culture than in any other culture. Widows are treated as pariahs. Before the british banned it many widows were even burned alive with their dead husbands.

yep, borat had such subtlety, and Hollywood makes movies with such subtle and nuanced jokes, the wasp-harvard mafia must have learned a thing or two.

Borat is hardly typical Jewish humor. Sacha Cohen is a Brit and his stuff is more Benny Hill and Fawlty Towers than Jewish. Seinfeld is standard issue Jewish humor, self-deprecating and quite scathing about that clique of Jewish yuppies, while giving us un-PC gems like the Puerto Rican Day parade riot.

yep, borat had such subtlety, and Hollywood makes movies with such subtle and nuanced jokes, the wasp-harvard mafia must have learned a thing or two.

I'd also add that Borat was hardly a long series of dumb Polish jokes. The comedy appeared to be making fun of people who take great pride in things that, objectively-speaking, ought not be a source of pride. The laughs come partly from the absurdity of misplaced pride. The other major aspect of Cohen's humor is his use of several different oddball personas, from Ali G, Borat to Bruno, to enact a kind of bizarro and profane Candid Camera setup, but played completely straight from start to finish. What sticks out is the similarity to Fawlty Towers, Monty Python and Benny Hill - a lot of absurdist humor.

*India has a million untouchable Negritos living in remote forests who are untouchable. Negritos look just like blacks

*Wherever Indians live with blacks - Africa, South Africa, Mauritius, Caribbean, UK, USA, - Indians have been victimised by black crime.Lots of Indians own Kwik-e-marts and these are frequently robbed by blacks

* Indians get reverse discrimination, blacks get affirmative action

In South Africa, in Natal, the Afrikaner party won seats with Indian votes. I guess a lot of kwik-e-mart Indians would vote Republican for the crime factor

The rest of Indians never come into contact with blacks and live in Suburbs, far away from blacks

Less Philanthropic than Europeans, more Philanthropic than blacks and Hispanics

Almost all the Hindu swamis run charitable institutions like Schools and Hospitals

The richest Hindu temple in India, the Tirupati Temple, runs a bunch of schools, colleges and hospitals from its donations

The RSS, the parent organisation of the BJP, runs over 100k charities in slums and remote villages and has 75000 schoolsand over 500 colleges in which 4 million kids are brainwashed in its ideology - sort of the Hindu Madrasa, except that modern education is given

Hindu businessmen will donate to charities if a building is named after them

The biggest anti-leprosy program in India is run by a Hindu right-wing monastic order, and they have even taken over most of the anti-leprosy programs of Mother Theresa group

ISKCON feeds a million kids daily in the school lunch program, and this is funded partly by the state and partly by private Hindu donations

Anon wrote - "it is my sincere wish that you'll get to know Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior."

Rec1man, you come from a place where there are regular religious-themed riots ("communal violence") in which hundreds of people die at a time. And yet you make a point of being offended at the above words.

--

The average Christian has every right to say these words

But to get that from your Republican opponent is very wierd and unsettlingWould the Republican use the same words if she lost to a Jew or a Mormon or a muslim ?

Its the gratutious anti-Hinduism of the Republican party that turns off Indians

Anon wrote - The single most important HBD issue related to America however, and the single most under-investigated & discussed issue everywhere in the HBD world IMO, is Mean Reversion!! ---- the `Holy Grail` of America’s HBD future.

The sad foreseeable future prospect that even already-highly selected 120 IQ doctor - convenient shops owner parents WILL produce offspring , on average, of third world IQ (even on top of due Flynn points) will have much more far-reaching impact on Republicans and America.

--

Actually in the second generation as per SAT scores, National Merit, Med School admissions, the kids of Indian Americans are reverting to the mean of their castes. Not the overall Indian mean. The caste blend in the USA is 60% upper caste vs 20% in India

Stephen Hu, had a SAT-religion survey in 1990 and in 2002

In both cases, Hindu American kids came in 4th after Unitarian, Quaker, Jews

In California, out of 4900 Indian kids, 184 got National Merit, a hit rate of 4%, same as East Asian kids, 950 / 25000

And Razib had a study of Med School admissions , and Hindus were over-represented 10X, compared to 3.5X for Jewish kids.

You conveniently neglected to mention that these same kind of hindu Indians hate christians as well. Check out their hindu nationalist websites: they lump Muslims and Christians together as the "Abrahamic" enemy of the "Dharmic" religions of India. America being a majority christian nation one can imagine what their real feelings are towards America.

And considering that Judaism is the original Abrahamic religion, and the parent of both Christianity and Islam, one can imagine how they must really feel about Israel.

High caste Indians havw a deep and instinctive loathing for blacks, that has absolutely nothing to do with American attitudes. They expressed this in Uganda, Kenya and other places where the British imported them wholesale. - To caste Indians, black skin and coarse features denote inferiority, uncivilised backwardness and a general contempt. This is something that has been deeply ingrained for thousands of years.

You conveniently neglected to mention that these same kind of hindu Indians hate christians as well. Check out their hindu nationalist websites: they lump Muslims and Christians together as the "Abrahamic" enemy of the "Dharmic" religions of India. America being a majority christian nation one can imagine what their real feelings are towards America."

Sorry , it doesn't work that way.Very prominent Hindu nationalists such as NS Rajaram and Sita Ram Goel are very pro American , especially as a bulwark to Communism and Islam.Yes they do despise Christian exclusivism and monotheism but recognize that Americans by and large are a tolerant lot.Their main beef is with religious conversions in India.

And considering that Judaism is the original Abrahamic religion, and the parent of both Christianity and Islam, one can imagine how they must really feel about Israel."

Oops not quite. Yes they are not fans of Biblical monotheism-indeed their criticism of Moses can be as harsh as Mohammad.However they do recognize that Moses (and Jesus) were divinely inspired but feel that their true genius by hampered by ingrained "Semitic" notions of a jealous god.

How they "really feel" about Israel! LOL now white HBDers are shedding crocodile tears for Israel in order to bash Hindus.Now I have seen everything.

I would like to point your attention to a 2009 survey where Indians were the most pro Israel country on earth.

The relationship between Hindus and Jews is very simple-we don't bother them,they don't bother us!

What many Hindu bashers fail to mention is that all sorts of Christian sects found refuge and thrived in India before the Portuguese and the British graced us with their "civilization"Ditto for Arab Muslim traders in the South before Turks and Mughals "introduced" Islam to mostly unwilling masses.

As for the religious riots...there is always conflict there is Islam...re Islams bloody borders by Samuel Huntington..its only a matter of time before U.S indulges in the same so I won't get too snippy about anti Muslim rioting in India.

As for anti Christian rioting- it happens far less frequently and again it has much to do with conversions and such.Of course its indefensible and Christians should have the right to propagate their religion as per the Indian constitution.You do realize the Hindu right government had been voted out because among other things Hindus didn't care for such actions.

Hey do you ever wonder why there are no Hindu Parsi,Hindu Jew or Hindu Buddhist riots? Im guessing you probably don't..

High caste Indians havw a deep and instinctive loathing for blacks, that has absolutely nothing to do with American attitudes.They expressed this in Uganda, Kenya and other places where the British imported them wholesale.- To caste Indians, black skin and coarse features denote inferiority, uncivilised backwardness and a general contempt. This is something that has been deeply ingrained for thousands of years."

Err no...if that was the case then Rama and Krishna, both dark skinned warrior Kings wouldn't be deified as gods.

Indeed if you see paintings of royal personages on the Ajanta and Ellora caves, you find kings and queens were often darker skinned than even their servants.

This notion of dark=inferior/unattractive comes from Central Asian interlopers-of whom they were converts to both Hinduism(Hunas,Sakas,Gurjara Pratiharas and Parmars) and Islam(Turks,Mughals and what have you)

And British also contributed to this preference for fair skin via their "civilization"...funny how you never bring THAT up!

To caste Indians, black skin and coarse features denote inferiority, uncivilised backwardness and a general contempt. This is something that has been deeply ingrained for thousands of years.

Nonsense. The caste Hindus worship black skinned gods and consider them beautiful. For example the most popular Hindu god, Krishna, is described as shyama sundara which is Sanskrit for black and handsome.

Interesting point that no one recognizes as one of the possible reasons for indian-americans support for the pro-abortion Democrats."

What is the evidence that Indian American women abort their female foetus's in record numbers?To be sure 1st generation women from Jat,Sikh and other northwestern people in U.K practice it for sure but not so much other communities.

Isn't it weird that when the whitest people in India are successful say at the military its because of their superior genes which has little to do with Hindu ethics and culture but their more disagreeable practices are automatically laid at the feet of Hinduism!

Female foeticide and infanticide is a big issue among hindus and sikhs. Women are valued less in hindu culture than in any other culture."

Somewhere a Saudi is weeping.

Widows are treated as pariahs. Before the british banned it many widows were even burned alive with their dead husbands."

Utter drivel.Sati was restricted to higher(though poor) castes (thats the more Caucasoid types) in Northern India.It was precisely because the widow had too many rights with respect to her upkeep that many unscrupulous families made a dubious justification of Sati( which was supposed a voluntary and honorable way of ending your life than be ravaged by Muslim soldier-yes the practice can be traced back to Muslim invasions)

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the 9-11 effect on Indian voting patterns. Indians suspect that White Conservative Christians (I.e. Republican voters) can't be bothered to learn the difference between brown-skinned Hindus and Sikhs, and brown-skinned Muslims. They just see them all as brown-skinned people who want to blow them up. What happened in Wisconsin only confirms the fears of most all Indians of any religion. I really think this has a lot to do with why Indians vote Democrat."

This is probably true.They probably don't realize that by and large Americans ,left or right, have no ill will towards Hindus.I think it is mostly Sikhs who bear the brunt of being mistaken for Muslims due to their more Middle Eastern features as well as their beards and turbans.

There are quite a few Indian American who feel there is a victimhood deficit amongst them and do their best to aggravate. This often means piggybacking off Muslim American feelings of victimhood of which there is no shortage.In the bloody awful movies My Name is Khan and Loins of Punjab both targeted towards Indian Americans, this was a major sub plot.

Tiny minority of Northern India “upper” caste is at best as “white” as Afghanistan or Pakistan, where virtually all Bollywood stars come from. They are Middle Eastern Caucasoid by origin.

“Upper” Caste Northern Indians are non-white, a world away from Europeans actually. The best slice of them came from Persia/Iran originally thus have average IQ of high 80s at best, even though they partially share some European Y-DNA due to historical reasons.

A mix of “Upper” Caste Northern Indians (high 80s IQ on average, >100 IQ for those who immigrated to the West due to selective immigration) and European Whites will have offspring with significantly reduced average IQ than the European average.

This might not appear very obvious in the beginning due to some Flynn Effect of much better nutrition and first-world environment, yet it eventually will be the cases when Reversal-to-the-Mean gradually kicks in.

Mother Nature never fail: a trailer trash type dumb White will have offspring moving towards European average of 100, while a Silicon Valley super guru type Indian techie or doctor will have offspring moving towards Indian average IQ of low 80s (in case of low caste Indians) or high 80s (in case of high caste Indians).

though another site says that the verbal twice was for asians and women got their piece of the pie when the writing skills section was added(so they might have wanted verbal twice before realizing the futility of it). And now it doesn't count the verbal twice.

http://collegeadmissions.testmasters.com/psat-nmsqt-history/

"And Razib had a study of Med School admissions , and Hindus were over-represented 10X, compared to 3.5X for Jewish kids."

"perhaps natures way of saying no Caucasoid people is meant to have a mean IQ as high as the superior Mongoloids.:

I just really don't get it. Have we been victims of mass hypnosis? It's like the creators of a great civilization telling those who want to enter as they themselves have not done anything quite so advance, that they must be superior, because they want to enter...oh--that's how it really is.Weird. Asians (far, northeastern kind) have a few points on the Caucasoid average, and no points at all on the average in some of the individual, overwhelmingly white countries.But what probably makes the most difference is simply the fact that Caucasoid distribution is broader--there is a far higher percentage of those with IQs in the genius range (and the moron range, on the other side) among whites than there are among Asians. The black distribution, like the yellow, is more narrow than the white, but just much further to the left side of the bell curve.I remember reading that the bell curve for far eastern Asians is so narrow -- even if slightly more the right -- compared to whites, that they have almost no individuals with IQs in what would be considered the genius ranges.Concerning Indians, they do seem to have an extremely wide range of IQ distribution, and there are genuiuses among them, even if their quantity has been exaggerated. There have been, particularly, math geniuses from among south Indians. I don't know enough about Indian ethnicity and caste to say what group he was from, but I don't think Tamils in general display great intelligence. However, the particular group this man was from, was known for producing math geniuses.

"Seinfeld is standard issue Jewish humor, self-deprecating and quite scathing about that clique of Jewish yuppies, while giving us un-PC gems like the Puerto Rican Day parade riot."

They always nix that on the re-runs. However, the one where George thinks he needs a black friend, any black will do, tends to get play. And apropos to this thread, the one where the Sue Elle Mishkie marries and Indian guy whose own parents refuse to return to India for the ceremony due to India being dreadful... pure gold.It also make riotous fun of Asian-o-philia and the quavering whites (Jewish in this case) who perpetrate it.

The facts are that Indians, especially the upper castes, are very pro israel and pro america. Here are some links that talk about some surveys done on the issue - http://israelmatzav.blogspot.com/2010/04/most-pro-israel-country-in-world.htmlhttp://www.pewglobal.org/2006/02/28/india-pro-america-pro-bush/

The facts are that Indians, especially the upper castes, are very pro israel

How do you reconcile that with the fact that upper caste hindu nationalists hate the "abrahamic" religions? Are these people so ignorant they do not know that Judaism is the original abrahamic religion and that Abraham is the Father of the Jews?

It is obvious that this is just another example of cynical sucking up to the powerful that characterizes the brahmin character. In other places on the internet, such as Stormfront, these same brahmins suck up to nazis and try to find common cause with them.

How do you all manage to reconcile nazism with zionism? Your hatred for abrahamic religions with your claimed love for jews?

The opposition to the "abrahamic" religions in India is chiefly related to the violent Islamic presence and the aggressive christian missionary activity there. No one in india has any issues with Abrahamic religions per se, and therefore no one hates Judaism for being the big bad ancestor of the Abrahamic religions. Have you read those links I posted? The opposition from the Hindu right is targeted NOT at the religious teachings of Islam and Christianity, but at the fact that both of these are out to annihilate Hinduism in the land of its birth. On the other hand, the chief opposition to Hinduism in Christian and Islamic circles is with regard to the religious teaching itself, the polytheism, idolatry etc.

Left to themselves, hindus would not know or care about Israel. Jews dont proselytize, and there is a 2000 year old jewish community in India that has never faced any antisemitism. The reason hindus are growing progressively fonder of Israel is that it is the sole country in the world that aggressively handles Islamic fundamentalism. The most pro-Israel camp in India is the Hindu right. Apart from the Islam thing, they also respect Israel's cultural nationalism. It is what they aspire to create in India - they want a Hindu "Zionism" to take root in India.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the 9-11 effect on Indian voting patterns. Indians suspect that White Conservative Christians (I.e. Republican voters) can't be bothered to learn the difference between brown-skinned Hindus and Sikhs, and brown-skinned Muslims. They just see them all as brown-skinned people who want to blow them up. What happened in Wisconsin only confirms the fears of most all Indians of any religion. I really think this has a lot to do with why Indians vote Democrat.

That, and the abrupt end of the Cold War. If the Cold War lasted a decade longer, Republicans would have reached out to Hindus as fellow religious people, against the tide of godless communism. The Republicans reached out to Catholics and Jews, and were starting do to the same to Muslims, just when the Cold War ended. The game changed from Theist vs. Atheist; to (evangelical) Christian vs. everyone else.

I don't think you know what zionism means. Hindus already have a homeland...

"Hindu Zionism" is an oxymoron in more ways than one. The jews are uniting as an ethnicity, a nation, a religion; while hinduism from its vedic origins is a fundamentally divisive religion. Just look at the contempt the brahmin posters here have for their fellow hindus. Its a very ugly thing to see.

You dont seem to understand the sense in which I use Hindu Zionism. Hinduism didnt exist prior to 1850, only castes did. Hindu "Zionism" is far removed from Hinduism the religion. A Hindu "Zionism" would seek to end the caste hatred that is so pervasive in India. Which is why the intellectuals on the Hindu right are very staunchly anti caste. Not to mention most elected leaders of the Hindu right are from the backward castes.

Hindus don't have a homeland, in the sense that India is not officially considered a Hindu nation anywhere. No Indian policies are targeted towards the welfare and promotion of the Hindu majority, unlike Israel where expansion of settlements and retaining control of Jerusalem is state policy. Or China, where the goverment aggressively settles Han chinese in minority regions to convert the demographic pattern.

Once the Muslim population in India hits 40%, the sh*t will hit the fan. Their growth rate is already the highest. It's either civil war or another bloody partition. It already happened in Persia, Byzantium, the Balkans, Nigeria, Lebanon.

Sailer wants to classify Indians as "Caucasians", and yet the average Sailer reader isn't even willing to admit that Indians are "Caucasoids". The idea that swarthy, hairy Arabs and - even worse - the pagan darkies of the subcontinent could have shared ancestry with white Europeans is too much to bear.

Indians are obviously not Caucasians, though I suppose some people still use "Caucasian" as synonymous with Caucasoid. Whatever.

Isn't it possible that the more than a billion people on the subcontinent belong to more than one race? Caucasoid obviously includes Parsis and most upper-caste Hindustanis, and not most Dravidians, for example.

What you're obviously running into is the the problem of conflating Caucasoid with White. White as a racial term means largely descended from Europeans, and as an ethnic mean identify ones heritage as European. Neither of these terms applies to Indians.

It makes perfect sense for Whites to want to disidentify with Arabs, given that they attack Americans all the time and have been doing so since Jefferson and Adams, and have been attacking Europeans since the 8th Century. But you're wrong that alt-rightists want to disidentify even more with the people of India.

Another reason for indian-americans to not vote Republican: they are home to racists.

Even though many indians themselves like to act racist they know that in America they will always be on the losing end of this game, handicapped because of their very dark color.

A few years ago, Republican Senator Allen pointed his finger at a young indian-american and called him a macaca or monkey...from the stage. And in the just concluded Republican Convention a black reporter had peanuts thrown at her and called an animal.

Hindu "Zionism" is far removed from Hinduism the religion. A Hindu "Zionism" would seek to end the caste hatred that is so pervasive in India. Which is why the intellectuals on the Hindu right are very staunchly anti caste.

That doesn't make any sense. If you are "far removed" from hinduism why identify yourself as a hindu?

"Really? The Republicans focus their efforts on social issues?What alternative reality do you people live in?"

Abortion. Gun control. Gay marriage etc.

The context was someone saying they were stupid for doing so. My reply was that they use these issues to distract their voters from their economic policy - especially the part about betraying their voter's children's economic future through open borders and an endless supply of cheap labor.

"Hindu" is not a fixed religious identity. No "hindu" religious text in the past 3000 years refers to its followers as "Hindu". The term was used by the Persians to refer to everyone who lived on the other side of the Indus. The Muslim invaders called the Buddhist monks they massacred "Hindus". There is a broad similarity in culture owing to India's geographical layout, but there is no single authority or book that can declare someone Hindu.

In today's India it is a catch-all term for any native of India who isnt a muslim, christian, jew, sikh, jain, buddhist, parsi. The constitution of India actually groups Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs as Hindus. Supreme court cases have been fought on whether Jains are Hindus or not. There is no initiation to hinduism, there is no marker of being Hindu.

It is a negative definition, more of an ethnic marker than anything specifically religious. It is something like using an umbrella term to refer to all the native american cultures prior to European colonization, or all the black African cultures prior to European colonization.

And I know it is tragic that Hindu conservatives do not support conservatism in other countries. They should. Not just in Israel but also in America and Europe and so on. Hindu conservatism identifies with Japanese, Korean, Israeli conservatism and less with Christian conservatism because only the first three are ethnic cultural nationalisms. Christian American conservatism is a religious ideology that actually relies on belief in a book rather than nationalism. On the other hand, in Europe we have plenty of movements like those of Marine le Pen and Geert Wilders which we identify with.

"Hindu Zionism" is an oxymoron in more ways than one. The jews are uniting as an ethnicity, a nation, a religion; while hinduism from its vedic origins is a fundamentally divisive religion. Just look at the contempt the brahmin posters here have for their fellow hindus. Its a very ugly thing to see."

Where pray are these Brahmin posters like myself and rec1man bashing other Hindus?

rec1man was only stating some distasteful facts about mostly upper caste Hindus like himself!

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.